tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3045488734527759793.post542017440335333957..comments2013-04-30T15:28:56.967-06:00Comments on concept ships: Commercial airliner fuselage ejector mechanism conceptIgor Tkachttps://plus.google.com/111573736551879591679noreply@blogger.comBlogger16125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3045488734527759793.post-35083750728618868512013-01-26T15:51:28.126-07:002013-01-26T15:51:28.126-07:00Looks like the idea dates back at least to the 193...Looks like the idea dates back at least to the 1930s http://davidszondy.com/future/Flight/crunch.htmDanielhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14488553957994914103noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3045488734527759793.post-44324722970194217782012-10-16T11:50:43.699-06:002012-10-16T11:50:43.699-06:00What about explosive bolts to remove the wings, wh...What about explosive bolts to remove the wings, which will remove the two fuel tanks and engines then drop the mid fuel tank and cargo hold in one section. As this is happen or just after small chutes are released to slow fuselage down so that the main chutes/ weight bearing chutes can then deploy. Removing the wings, engines, all fuel tanks and cargo would reduce the weight so the chutes could handle the weight.Peter Hughes-Smithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06729570524687633311noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3045488734527759793.post-39373500712688771482011-01-28T09:42:50.287-07:002011-01-28T09:42:50.287-07:00This post is really amaizing good done keep postin...This post is really amaizing good done keep postingAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3045488734527759793.post-40821965682327265532010-08-25T05:19:37.378-06:002010-08-25T05:19:37.378-06:00Not to mention the current forward velocity would ...Not to mention the current forward velocity would have a severe affect on the chutes, youre losing all control surfaces so persay you drift down into a mountain range at relatively high speeds you&#39;re pretty much screwed anyway. With most current Commerical designs, it is a requirement for the plane to work as it should with one engine out. it has already been designed to a standard that would not need this implementation. The splitting in the fuselage would also cause all sorts of problems.. Pressure differentials, stress concentrations. It&#39;s really not plausible in my view.<br />Nice concept though.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3045488734527759793.post-75800950457799684282010-03-17T19:05:13.906-06:002010-03-17T19:05:13.906-06:00Way late to the show here but the F-111 crew compa...Way late to the show here but the F-111 crew compartment completely separated from the aircraft, deployed chutes and had pontoons on the bottom. It&#39;s not that it&#39;s not possible, it would require a major design revisions.Mike Vhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01648069884133255897noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3045488734527759793.post-51837847950426290692009-06-07T18:02:57.343-06:002009-06-07T18:02:57.343-06:00I must also add that, since most aircraft accident...I must also add that, since most aircraft accidents happen during takeoff and landing, an ejection system would not work for most accidents.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3045488734527759793.post-76956039516789031322008-11-08T17:47:00.000-07:002008-11-08T17:47:00.000-07:00On a random side-note, an engine fire is really no...On a random side-note, an engine fire is really not much of an issue on modern airliners. First off, there are multiple extinguishing systems built in and if those all fail, the engine will burn itself off of the wing, allowing the aircraft to continue on the remaining engine (and depositing a massive hunk of burning debris in someone's back yard).<BR/><BR/>But yes, as someone mentioned, any major explosion caused by a bomb would most likely be inside the cabin, so it wouldn't really matter if you could eject the fuselage from the rest of the airframe (never mind all the structural issues).<BR/><BR/>Still an entertaining concept.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3045488734527759793.post-79146922274599426832008-09-22T17:11:00.000-06:002008-09-22T17:11:00.000-06:00Thanks for the insightful answers everyone. I didn...Thanks for the insightful answers everyone. I didn't realize just how integral the fuselage is to the structure of the ship.<BR/> Check out <A HREF="http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/news_events/futuristics/oddities/2.html" REL="nofollow">this</A> illustration I've stumbled upon from 1960!conceptshipsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3045488734527759793.post-3292161538882255662008-09-16T02:42:00.000-06:002008-09-16T02:42:00.000-06:00I work for Boeing and the structural reinforcement...I work for Boeing and the structural reinforcement necessary to prevent the entire thing from simply exploding would be so extensive that the aircraft would never ever fly. Its landing gear would buckle under the weight. Its simply not feasible with the way current aircraft are designed and by that I mean our entire concept of lift and thrust. Perhaps if repulsorlift drives existed we could afford to have fuselages made out of reinfored titanium and steel but with our current understanding of flight this is frankly a ridiculous concept. Not that it doesnt have merit, its just not possible without totally reinventing the concept of flight.DM-Horushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12067112459921175642noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3045488734527759793.post-39648380569095302072008-08-06T13:30:00.000-06:002008-08-06T13:30:00.000-06:00The idea it's not new, sorry.Northrop aviation (no...The idea it's not new, sorry.<BR/>Northrop aviation (now Northrop Grumman) tested it on the 60's and the beggining of the 70's.<BR/><BR/>It was rejected, all the tests ended in complete disaster.<BR/><BR/>Iread about this about 9-10 years ago, and I don't remember the name of the book. If you want more info there's a page on the ucla website called visions of futer or visions of past future (can't remember) filled with retrofuturistic images. He migth know somethingAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3045488734527759793.post-21784400731362294502008-05-24T21:36:00.000-06:002008-05-24T21:36:00.000-06:00There isn't much I could say that hasn't already b...There isn't much I could say that hasn't already been covered by the previous comments. <BR/>Its pretty amazing. <BR/>:P <BR/>"Statistically speaking flying is still the safest way to travel"<BR/>-SupermanDAN-VAN-COOLhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15545032173440428924noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3045488734527759793.post-2378779235933955092008-05-21T12:02:00.000-06:002008-05-21T12:02:00.000-06:00Madness,I guess I better stick to my art and leave...Madness,<BR/>I guess I better stick to my art and leave the engineering to the educated professionals:]<BR/>The compromise in the structure of the ship would be an issue for sure.<BR/><BR/>Keith,<BR/>Good answers. Putting rocket ejectors near the fuel compartment does not sound safe for sure. I'm thinking that the tail section would actually be a part of the fuselage and maybe instead of ejecting... The fuselage would slide off to the rear of the plane by motors, could solve the straight down issue. Like the way a battery pops out of a video cam.<BR/><BR/>Maybe this idea is better suited for film or a video game cinematic but it is fun to walk the line between sci-fi and realism.<BR/><BR/>I think it would be interesting to hold a "contest" to see what kind of design people could come up with around this concept.<BR/><BR/>Thanks for participating in the discussion... Later!conceptshipsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3045488734527759793.post-11563564727352295962008-05-21T08:44:00.000-06:002008-05-21T08:44:00.000-06:00Wouldn't work for a few reasons:-- You couldn't po...Wouldn't work for a few reasons:<BR/><BR/>-- You couldn't possibly generate enough rocket power to lift that much mass high enough to clear the rear tail structure. This was/is a real problem with single ejector seats on fighter jets. If you are relying on gravity to just drop the fuselage away then you are cutting down the instances where this could work. Think of a plane going straight down.<BR/><BR/>-- You'd need to reinforce the entire structure to make it survive the acceleration and landing. This would add too much weight.<BR/><BR/>-- If the explosion or problem is within the cabin area then this idea is moot.<BR/><BR/>-- Most problems are at low level where no ejection would be possible. Fighter pilots can't eject at very low levels and need big rocket boosts. You'd need HUGE rockets to eject that much mass. Things go wrong so quickly in most accidents you'd likely not have time to react and push the eject button. Who would decide to push that button?<BR/><BR/>All that said. A method for ejecting just the passenger+seat may be feasible. Some bombers allow the crew to drop down out of the plane rather than boosting them upward. That seems feasible to me. you could put the seats on little rails with motors to shoot them out the bottom of the plane. However, all the structure and baggage area below the cabin would be lost so this probably isn't feasible for an airline interesting in making money.<BR/><BR/>It's an interesting thing to think about though.Keithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01513925133917245722noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3045488734527759793.post-2638910282979313882008-05-21T08:06:00.000-06:002008-05-21T08:06:00.000-06:00My issue isn't actually with the parachutes, it's ...My issue isn't actually with the parachutes, it's with the way this design will change the flex of the plane. The fuselage holds everything together, and twists to certain tolerances. Adding a big division to that will change how the fuselage twists and reacts to turbulence, potentially increasing the odds of the plane going down in the first place. I could very well be wrong here, but that would be my concern. Still, what a great idea! A super-eject seat.madnessmanual.comhttp://madnessmanual.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3045488734527759793.post-42610753846770956702008-05-21T00:20:00.000-06:002008-05-21T00:20:00.000-06:00Air travel is most def safe for what it is.I think...Air travel is most def safe for what it is.<BR/><BR/>I think about how different 9/11 could have been with this system employed. (That is of course not taking the terrorists tactics knowing about this system in to account.)<BR/><BR/>Would it even have happened at all? United flight 93 could have had a happier ending with this system in place.<BR/><BR/>I think the parachute physics is trivial. We landed on the moon almost 40 years ago. That fuselage part could be a super composite material. I think if a good pilot had enough time, he could slow the aircraft down enough for it to work.<BR/><BR/>Your answer gave me another idea too though. Individual parachute pods for every row of seats? Bananas!<BR/><BR/>This accident in particular comes to mind though... I think it would have worked good in that instance. This clip always brings a tear to my eye... The pilot(s) did so much there. Unreal.<BR/><A HREF="http://www.livevideo.com/video/3210D366C7D14B669ED5048457EFAE65/plane-crashes-into-ocean.aspx/" REL="nofollow">plane crash </A>conceptshipsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3045488734527759793.post-55722588839433903802008-05-20T23:37:00.000-06:002008-05-20T23:37:00.000-06:00This is actually a pretty ingenious concept. I'm n...This is actually a pretty ingenious concept. I'm not quite sure about how well the parachutes would work holding that kind of weight, if thats even possible. This obviously would need to be addressed in future plane designs (maybe with the use of lightweight materials that can support that kind of weight and force, especially traveling at those speeds).<BR/><BR/>When you think of all the talk about how safe modern air travel is, you'd almost think that something like this would probably be not be of much use. But then you have to wonder "What if...". I speak for myself when I say I personally would like every and any possible precaution available to me as a customer. If that means eject-able pods with parachutes, then you bet your ass I want it.Joel Carlohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11078825575707376285noreply@blogger.com